Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Order Revision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Curry County commissioners adopt revised order to formalize cooperation with sheriff after litigation
Summary
At a special meeting, the Curry County Board of Commissioners voted to adopt a revised board order—replacing two prior orders—to require coordination with the Curry County Sheriff and directed county counsel to request supporting documents produced in the litigation. The change includes a provision that county counsel, not the sheriff, determine privilege.
The Curry County Board of Commissioners voted at a special meeting to adopt a revised board order that repeals and replaces earlier board orders referenced in the transcript as 23-5-10 and 23-6-19 and requires formal coordination and cooperation between the board and the Curry County Sheriff.
The motion to adopt the revised order was made by Unidentified Speaker 2 and seconded by Unidentified Speaker 1; the board called the question and recorded affirmative responses, approving the order. Commissioners named in the meeting transcript include Commissioner Kocher, Commissioner Hollinger and Commissioner Coker, who recorded aye responses during the roll call sequence.
Why it matters: commissioners said the revised language responds to recent litigation and provides clearer procedures for documents and privilege determinations. The board cited "192.660 subsection 2(h)" as the statutory authority for meeting in executive session to consult with counsel about litigation before returning to public session to take action.
Key changes and direction: attendees described a new or clarified paragraph requiring the sheriff to make available "all records, information, and supporting documents to County legal counsel and the board upon request, to the extent such information is not legally privileged or clearly exempt from disclosure." Unidentified Speaker 4 introduced the addition that, if privileged material is requested, "the sheriff shall identify the specific documents ineligible for production, shall discuss such restrictions with county legal counsel, and shall defer to such determinate determinations of legality made by county legal counsel," arguing that "the sheriff is not competent or qualified to reach legal determinations on behalf of the county." Meeting speakers said Judge Stone had preferred that language and that it would reduce confusion.
The board also reached consensus to direct county counsel to request the documentation that led to the board order and any recent information necessary to address county concerns. The motion and post-vote direction were explicit that county counsel should seek the records and consult on any privilege assertions.
The board adjourned the special meeting after the vote and the direction to counsel.
